Agenda Profile: Irja Lutsar
Chair implementation
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
Political Position
The political stance is heavily focused on improving the organization and efficiency of the Riigikogu, criticizing the 35-minute debate held on the topic of a missing rapporteur. Furthermore, the speaker adopts a clear position, based on the recommendations issued by the Health Board, stating that the isolation requirement for close contacts is currently not in effect in Estonia. These positions are primarily performance-based and procedural, demanding accountability and a swift resolution.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in parliamentary procedure, emphasizing the necessity of substitution and accountability, referencing the practices of Eesti 200. Awareness of current public health regulations is particularly evident, citing the Health Board (Terviseamet) and confirming that close contacts are not required to self-isolate. Specific examples are utilized (the availability of mobile phones, personal close contact).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and impatient, conveying astonishment and dissatisfaction regarding the wasted time ("I listen and listen and wonder"). Logical arguments are employed (the existence of mobile phones, Health Board instructions), and the opposing party is required to issue a clear apology and assume responsibility. The tone is formal, yet sharply aimed at procedural shortcomings.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in discussions regarding the implementation of the session, offering concrete solutions (a recess, making phone calls). Reference is made to their participation in a previous event ("at an event yesterday morning") alongside other politicians, which demonstrates intense social and political activity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main objection is aimed at procedural failures and the avoidance of responsibility, criticizing Arvo for either concealing information or being unprepared. The speaker also casts doubt on the justification for Evelin Poolamets’s absence, calling the isolation excuse "very, very, very strange." A clear apology and a change in conduct are demanded.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker highlights Eesti 200's internal workflow as a positive example when finding substitutes, emphasizing the importance of teamwork. Their style of cooperation is demanding, expecting an apology and accountability from the opposing party in order to provide "solace" to the entire company gathered in the hall.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is entirely on national topics, addressing the internal procedure of the Riigikogu (Parliament) and the nationwide public health regulations established by the Health Board. There are no references to specific regional or local issues.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Public health issues are being addressed, emphasizing that diseases requiring the isolation of close contacts are not circulating in Estonia. This position clearly contradicts the justification for isolation, based on official Health Board recommendations.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is on ensuring the procedural organization and efficiency of the Riigikogu session (Session Implementation). The Speaker acts as the initiator, proposing solutions (such as a recess or a roll call) and demanding accountability to prevent any future wasting of time.
2 Speeches Analyzed